The ex-wife of former Los Angeles Dodgers owner Frank McCourt wants to set aside the couple’s divorce settlement, claiming he vastly understated the value of a team that sold earlier this year for $2 billion, the highest figure ever paid for a pro sports franchise.
Jamie McCourt’s attorney, Bertram Fields, told The Associated Press that she “thought very long and very hard about whether to file this motion” but that after other means failed, she returned to court.
Jamie McCourt, you’ll recall, settled their divorce case for $131 million. This was back when Frank McCourt didn’t look like he’d end up with a pot to piss in because absolutely no one figured he’d get $2 billion for the Dodgers. At the time she and her quite able legal staff made what they thought was a good deal.
Her theory is fraud -- that Frank misrepresented the value of the Dodgers. I presume the counter will be that hanging on for the ride in the sale of a professional sports franchise is a risky endeavor and, by settling before the sale, Jamie decided not to assume any risk yet now wants the rewards of that sale.
I really don’t know the intricacies of rich people divorce cases, so I have no idea if she has a leg to stand on, legally speaking. But my kneejerk reaction is to say that it takes an awful lot of chutzpah to sleep with the help, blow up the marriage, sue your ex, settle for well over $100 million as everyone in the world is also going after him and then, over a year later, come back and say “please, sir, I’d like some more.”
That said, the fact that I can muster any sympathy for a guy like McCourt here kind of turns my stomach, so maybe I should just root for expensive, protracted litigation that bankrupts them both and leaves no winners.
